Well today if Shakhtar Donetsk hadn't imploded and conceded a penalty in the 3rd minute (earliest red card in champions league history as well), they would have just needed a 1-1 draw or better to go through. With the 7-0 thumping we all know who was the better team, but if the 3rd minute sending off hadn't happened and they had gotten the 1-1 draw, I'd have been hotter than Death Valley in July if I was a Bayern fan. There are better ways to settle a tied aggregate. Shit just send them to penalties. Rule is awful
Agreed. Except: a) That didn't happen though did it? b) But if we're doing 'what ifs' - What if you were a Shakhtar fan? also c) Sometimes the underdog scrapes through against a vastly superior team, which is a good thing isn't it?
Anyway, whenever any team goes out on away goals, obviously that team's supporters won't be happy about it. The supporters of the winning team? Not so bothered. But because Chelsea go out, suddenly everyone is up in arms about it. I'm not saying it's the best solution, (in fact changes to the rule have been gently suggested in the past), just that if it was such a shit rule, why haven't we all been loudly campaigning to get rid of it since 1965?
I do think it's flawed, but we all know the rules and so do all the players and managers. It's the same for everyone. Get over it.
Well, no. If something is flawed and damaging the game you don't just get over it, you try and get it fixed. I was certainly complaining about the away goal before this match and the media have picked up on it as well:
I think what's actually happening is that a lot more people watched this game because an English team were involved so it's generated more discussion, which is normal. The only reason it seems like it's only being discussed now is because of anti-Chelsea bias rather than the other way around. Just scroll up this page for evidence
I understand what you mean Garry, but when I say "get over it" I'm talking about the bleating after the event. Yes, change the rule, but not just because darling Jose got beat. That's all I'm saying.
My crazy American friend when trying to get into football has always found away goals and penalty shoot outs a strange way to decide a tie. He suggested at one point something along the lines of reducing each side by one player every time the ball goes out of play in extra time until a deciding goal is scored.
My crazy American friend when trying to get into football has always found away goals and penalty shoot outs a strange way to decide a tie. He suggested at one point something along the lines of reducing each side by one player every time the ball goes out of play in extra time until a deciding goal is scored.
Away goals ruin the competition, because the first match is always boring. The home team don't want to concede, and the away team are away from home so don't attack as much. They should just scrap the stupid rule.
My crazy American friend when trying to get into football has always found away goals and penalty shoot outs a strange way to decide a tie. He suggested at one point something along the lines of reducing each side by one player every time the ball goes out of play in extra time until a deciding goal is scored.
That's something that Louis van Gaal thinks as well weirdly. He wants a player removed by both sides every five minutes until it's six a side. He also wants to ban throw ins. Louis van Gaal might be insane.
What does he want instead of throw-ins? Kick-ins so he can play his long ball game or does he want to have a wall like in five a side so the ball never goes out? I think players would be dead after 90 minutes.
What does he want instead of throw-ins? Kick-ins so he can play his long ball game or does he want to have a wall like in five a side so the ball never goes out? I think players would be dead after 90 minutes.
Stoke would never have survived their first season in the Premier League had that been the case
Well today if Shakhtar Donetsk hadn't imploded and conceded a penalty in the 3rd minute (earliest red card in champions league history as well), they would have just needed a 1-1 draw or better to go through. With the 7-0 thumping we all know who was the better team, but if the 3rd minute sending off hadn't happened and they had gotten the 1-1 draw, I'd have been hotter than Death Valley in July if I was a Bayern fan. There are better ways to settle a tied aggregate. Shit just send them to penalties. Rule is awful
Agreed. Except: a) That didn't happen though did it? b) But if we're doing 'what ifs' - What if you were a Shakhtar fan? also c) Sometimes the underdog scrapes through against a vastly superior team, which is a good thing isn't it?
Anyway, whenever any team goes out on away goals, obviously that team's supporters won't be happy about it. The supporters of the winning team? Not so bothered. But because Chelsea go out, suddenly everyone is up in arms about it. I'm not saying it's the best solution, (in fact changes to the rule have been gently suggested in the past), just that if it was such a shit rule, why haven't we all been loudly campaigning to get rid of it since 1965?
I do think it's flawed, but we all know the rules and so do all the players and managers. It's the same for everyone. Get over it.
Yes that all really happened yesterday with the Donetsk Bayern game. You act like I'm going to start a campaign to have the rule removed. We all hate it, it sucks and we have to abide by it and sadly it will take some time to change it. If god willing we ever got to the CL and this happened to us, I'm sure your tone would be the same
What does he want instead of throw-ins? Kick-ins so he can play his long ball game or does he want to have a wall like in five a side so the ball never goes out? I think players would be dead after 90 minutes.
Well today if Shakhtar Donetsk hadn't imploded and conceded a penalty in the 3rd minute (earliest red card in champions league history as well), they would have just needed a 1-1 draw or better to go through. With the 7-0 thumping we all know who was the better team, but if the 3rd minute sending off hadn't happened and they had gotten the 1-1 draw, I'd have been hotter than Death Valley in July if I was a Bayern fan. There are better ways to settle a tied aggregate. Shit just send them to penalties. Rule is awful
Agreed. Except: a) That didn't happen though did it? b) But if we're doing 'what ifs' - What if you were a Shakhtar fan? also c) Sometimes the underdog scrapes through against a vastly superior team, which is a good thing isn't it?
Anyway, whenever any team goes out on away goals, obviously that team's supporters won't be happy about it. The supporters of the winning team? Not so bothered. But because Chelsea go out, suddenly everyone is up in arms about it. I'm not saying it's the best solution, (in fact changes to the rule have been gently suggested in the past), just that if it was such a shit rule, why haven't we all been loudly campaigning to get rid of it since 1965?
I do think it's flawed, but we all know the rules and so do all the players and managers. It's the same for everyone. Get over it.
Yes that all really happened yesterday with the Donetsk Bayern game. You act like I'm going to start a campaign to have the rule removed. We all hate it, it sucks and we have to abide by it and sadly it will take some time to change it. If god willing we ever got to the CL and this happened to us, I'm sure your tone would be the same
I'm not acting like anything. And no, your 'what if' scenario - ie "if the 3rd minute sending off hadn't happened and they had gotten the 1-1 draw" didn't happen. Donetsk didn't keep 11 men on the field. They didn't get a 1-1 draw. They didn't go through. Did you forget you wrote that?
I've already said that I agree it's not perfect. That's not my issue. Now kindly wind your neck in.
Well today if Shakhtar Donetsk hadn't imploded and conceded a penalty in the 3rd minute (earliest red card in champions league history as well), they would have just needed a 1-1 draw or better to go through. With the 7-0 thumping we all know who was the better team, but if the 3rd minute sending off hadn't happened and they had gotten the 1-1 draw, I'd have been hotter than Death Valley in July if I was a Bayern fan. There are better ways to settle a tied aggregate. Shit just send them to penalties. Rule is awful
Agreed. Except: a) That didn't happen though did it? b) But if we're doing 'what ifs' - What if you were a Shakhtar fan? also c) Sometimes the underdog scrapes through against a vastly superior team, which is a good thing isn't it?
Anyway, whenever any team goes out on away goals, obviously that team's supporters won't be happy about it. The supporters of the winning team? Not so bothered. But because Chelsea go out, suddenly everyone is up in arms about it. I'm not saying it's the best solution, (in fact changes to the rule have been gently suggested in the past), just that if it was such a shit rule, why haven't we all been loudly campaigning to get rid of it since 1965?
I do think it's flawed, but we all know the rules and so do all the players and managers. It's the same for everyone. Get over it.
Yes that all really happened yesterday with the Donetsk Bayern game. You act like I'm going to start a campaign to have the rule removed. We all hate it, it sucks and we have to abide by it and sadly it will take some time to change it. If god willing we ever got to the CL and this happened to us, I'm sure your tone would be the same
I'm not acting like anything. And no, your 'what if' scenario - ie "if the 3rd minute sending off hadn't happened and they had gotten the 1-1 draw" didn't happen. Donetsk didn't keep 11 men on the field. They didn't get a 1-1 draw. They didn't go through. Did you forget you wrote that?
I've already said that I agree it's not perfect. That's not my issue. Now kindly wind your neck in.
Alright fair enough, but how can you not look at the what if scenarios? It's those scenarios that really piss off the players and fans. Yeah what if that sending off hadn't happened? What if that penalty on Costa had been given in the Chelsea game? If that decision is given then we probably wouldn't even be having this discussion to begin with. I know the "What if" is tacky and annoying, but you really have to look at them in this situation
Well today if Shakhtar Donetsk hadn't imploded and conceded a penalty in the 3rd minute (earliest red card in champions league history as well), they would have just needed a 1-1 draw or better to go through. With the 7-0 thumping we all know who was the better team, but if the 3rd minute sending off hadn't happened and they had gotten the 1-1 draw, I'd have been hotter than Death Valley in July if I was a Bayern fan. There are better ways to settle a tied aggregate. Shit just send them to penalties. Rule is awful
Agreed. Except: a) That didn't happen though did it? b) But if we're doing 'what ifs' - What if you were a Shakhtar fan? also c) Sometimes the underdog scrapes through against a vastly superior team, which is a good thing isn't it?
Anyway, whenever any team goes out on away goals, obviously that team's supporters won't be happy about it. The supporters of the winning team? Not so bothered. But because Chelsea go out, suddenly everyone is up in arms about it. I'm not saying it's the best solution, (in fact changes to the rule have been gently suggested in the past), just that if it was such a shit rule, why haven't we all been loudly campaigning to get rid of it since 1965?
I do think it's flawed, but we all know the rules and so do all the players and managers. It's the same for everyone. Get over it.
We all hate it, it sucks and we have to abide by it
Do we? I cant say I really care about it. The only time it ever would affect us is in a League Cup semifinal (LOL)so I dont think it matters to us.
As for your hypothetical scenario of us losing to away goals in the Champions League I think I would accept those were the rules at the start of the competition. Extra time causes a strange quirk but thats all it is. Chelsea lost ans PSV went t through so I'm happy enough
Maybe we shouldn't have extra time and go straight to penalties. After all that extra 30 minutes should benefit the home side rather than the away side.
I would have thought it makes more sense for the away goals rule to only apply after 2 periods of 90 minutes and then for it to go purely down to the result and penalties of the second game once extra time had commenced. I get the argument that playing 30 minutes at home is an advantage but surely so is penalties? The advantage of playing at home doesn't outweigh the disadvantage that if the away team scores in extra time, the home team then has to score two goals to avoid losing the tie.
Maybe if the tie goes to extra time we could scrap the away goals rule, say that it's effectively 0-0 and play for 30 minutes, before going to penalties if need be?
On the other hand, if Schalke had scored again v Real they would have gone through, which they would have deserved in my opinion. So maybe the rule isn't all bad.
@IA I Must say I laughed quite hard when I saw the last goal for PSG go in lol. I'm not saying I won't accept the rules if Charlton were in this position, but I just saying the rule is kind of hazy
It's not hazy. At the end of the second match (90 mins), if the scores are tied on aggregate, the team with the most away goals wins. If they have scored the same number of away goals, it goes to extra time.
At the end of extra time, if the scores are tied on aggregate, the team with the most away goals wins. If they have scored the same number of away goals, it goes to penalties.
Seems clear to me.
If you want to scrap away goals altogether, that's an understandable point of view. I think penalties are awful. I can live with away goals (sensibly applied - see Milan v Inter semifinal) if they reduce the likelihood of penalties.
Comments
That's all I'm saying.
I feel it should be only kept to the 90 minutes of a game (including standard added time)
If god willing we ever got to the CL and this happened to us, I'm sure your tone would be the same
Did you forget you wrote that?
I've already said that I agree it's not perfect. That's not my issue.
Now kindly wind your neck in.
As for your hypothetical scenario of us losing to away goals in the Champions League I think I would accept those were the rules at the start of the competition. Extra time causes a strange quirk but thats all it is. Chelsea lost ans PSV went t through so I'm happy enough
That was the only time the FA Cup was played over two legs and we famously reached the final having lost a game. (we won on aggregate)
What we found interesting was how the FA had decided ties that were level on goals after both games would be settled. .
Penalties. In 1945.
But as far as we know they were never used.
I Must say I laughed quite hard when I saw the last goal for PSG go in lol. I'm not saying I won't accept the rules if Charlton were in this position, but I just saying the rule is kind of hazy
At the end of extra time, if the scores are tied on aggregate, the team with the most away goals wins. If they have scored the same number of away goals, it goes to penalties.
Seems clear to me.
If you want to scrap away goals altogether, that's an understandable point of view. I think penalties are awful. I can live with away goals (sensibly applied - see Milan v Inter semifinal) if they reduce the likelihood of penalties.